So now you are claiming that eight years later in (Dec. 2009) that 14
companies are distributing a *specific* arrangement (compilation) of
source code that Erik Andersen himself personally "arranged" as an
original work in 2001?

No. I see that failure to read is included among
your many failings.
<http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Gaiman_v._McFarlane>
McFarlane’s registrations no more revealed an intent
to claim copyright in Gaiman’s contributions, as
distinct from McFarlane’s own contributions as
compiler and illustrator, than the copyright notices
did
Erik Anderson registered copyright in BusyBox because
he is an author of some of it, and needed to register
in order to pursue an infringement claim. As you can
see from the court case, it is legitimate to do so.